Truly, a sad day
Well, first went Yale Diva.
And then In the Right Direction.
Now Off The Fence is also calling it quits.
I have removed them from my blogroll, and now I am the only remaining conservative Yale blog (to my knowledge—please feel free to correct me as I'll be elated to be wrong).
It's a heavy burden to carry, to be sure, but hopefully I'll be able to handle it. In the meantime, if you happen to be a Yale conservative who comes across this blog, please email me if you have any interest in becoming a part-time contributor. In the immortal words of Abraham Simpson: Hello-o? I'm cold, and there are wolves after me.
Friday, January 07, 2005
Truly, a sad day
Thursday, January 06, 2005
God and Man Have Left The Building
While Yale isn't in such desperate straits, John Leo describes the saddening path that Weslyan seems to be following. Among his complaints are the encouragement of total sexual confusion via naked dorms and pornographic film classes, and a campaign aimed at forcing fraternities to accept female members.
It's sad, but true, that many campuses are gradually giving in to radical left-wing minorities in the name of "increasing diversity," while depriving the average student from a more desirable, more traditional experience.
We should only be so lucky
I really, really wish that George Will was writing for the White House. He recently offered a statement that he wishes he could hear from the President's lips, and I think if W listened to this advice, judicial nominations would go much, much smoother—particularly when relating to Roe v. Wade issues:
"Because I think it is improper to ask how a prospective judicial nominee would vote on a specific question, I shall not know how my nominees would rule in the event -- an unlikely event -- that the court revisits the constitutional foundation of abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade in 1973. However, I will seek judicial nominees disinclined to concoct spurious constitutional mandates for their policy preferences, as I believe the justices did in Roe. On the other hand, the orderly development of constitutional law requires that justices be generally disposed to respect precedents, even dubious ones, if they have been repeatedly reaffirmed for decades.[...]How refreshing would it be to hear that?
"Even many people who strongly favor abortion rights believe those rights should have been established by legislation rather than litigation. They believe, as I do, that Roe, which discovered a right to abortion in the emanations of penumbras -- or was it penumbras of emanations? -- of other rights, was judicial overreaching, indistinguishable from legislating.
"Notice the language of 'trimesters.' How is that demarcation grounded in the text, structure or previous construings of the Constitution? Ask yourself: What would constitutional law pertaining to abortion be if the number of months in the gestation of an infant were a prime number -- say, seven or 11? That the court spun different degrees of abortion rights from the fact that nine is divisible by three reveals that whatever the court was doing was not constitutional reasoning."
Fred Barnes reviews the massive gains made by Republicans in the '04 election, with dismal predictions for the future of the Dems. Not too harsh, but a good analysis of the year.
William Pfaff reviews the year in fanaticism.
John Gaddis (yes, he's a Yale professor) commends President Bush's first four years of foreign policy, but demands midcourse corrections that he calls "long overdue."
Walter Shapiro criticizes the speed with which the Dems have tried to run back to the drawing board. Not quite a year in review, but still important.
Suzanne Fields covers the same topic as Barnes (above) with much less insight, but adds a bit of information. Adam Nagourney offers more analysis in the NYT.